Published: Friday, October 30, 2009
SPEEA fears long-term impact of 787 decision
For now, engineers needed to fix S.C. plant’s errors
-
Associated Press
A Boeing employee works on an aft fuselage for the 787 inside the North Charleston, S.C., facility on Wednesday.
EVERETT — It’s not just the bruised ego of Machinists that Boeing Co. leadership will have to contend with after selecting Charleston, S.C., for the company’s second 787 assembly line.
Boeing’s engineering union in the Puget Sound region also got left in the lurch when Boeing decided not to put its second line alongside the first, here in Everett.
“This is a clear decision that the Boeing Co. is going to be setting up a rival BCA site,” said Ray Goforth, executive director of the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace.
That creates uncertainty for SPEEA members. In the near term, Goforth thinks that Boeing will need its engineers and technical workers’ expertise more than ever if it hopes to avoid some of the snags seen already in 787 parts production in Charleston.
The long term, however, is anyone’s guess.
In announcing Charleston as the home of the second line, Jim Albaugh, Boeing’s new president of commercial airplanes, sought to reassure Puget Sound area workers that the region is the “center for design, flight test and manufacturing.”
But Bill Dugovich, SPEEA communications director, pointed out that Boeing offered no job guarantees to its members, many of whom have been working overtime or have been sent to Charleston to fix problems created by 787 outsourcing.
“Many of our folks are correcting outsourcing problems,” Dugovich said. “The global supply chain has bred a plethora of problems.”
Boeing’s Albaugh, as well as company Chief Executive Jim McNerney, have said the company learned some lessons from the extensive outsourcing strategy of the 787. Most notably, they say the company needs to bring back in house some of the engineering work that Boeing initially gave responsibility to its supplier partners.
“Albaugh is saying all the right things about bringing back work,” SPEEA’s Goforth said.
But SPEEA’s leaders aren’t counting on Boeing to do the right things.
Goforth already sent his organizing director on a scouting trip to the South, looking for sites to organize engineering and technical workers. SPEEA’s director declined on Thursday to say which factories were visited.
Although SPEEA’s Goforth disagrees with Boeing’s choice of Charleston, he admits it makes sense to have engineering support on-site there. Boeing already sends SPEEA members from the Puget Sound region to help out in Charleston. Goforth doesn’t see that slowing with the addition of a second line — Boeing still needs experienced engineers and technical workers.
That was something Boeing’s original supplier, Vought, didn’t get. Boeing bought out Vought’s Charleston operation in July. Even with the help of Boeing engineers from this area helping out, the Charleston factory still sees “massive problems,” Goforth said.
Developing a new aircraft takes time and skilled workers, SPEEA’s Goforth and Dugovich said.
“That seems to be an overlooked challenge,” Dugovich said.
Boeing’s engineering union in the Puget Sound region also got left in the lurch when Boeing decided not to put its second line alongside the first, here in Everett.
“This is a clear decision that the Boeing Co. is going to be setting up a rival BCA site,” said Ray Goforth, executive director of the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace.
That creates uncertainty for SPEEA members. In the near term, Goforth thinks that Boeing will need its engineers and technical workers’ expertise more than ever if it hopes to avoid some of the snags seen already in 787 parts production in Charleston.
The long term, however, is anyone’s guess.
In announcing Charleston as the home of the second line, Jim Albaugh, Boeing’s new president of commercial airplanes, sought to reassure Puget Sound area workers that the region is the “center for design, flight test and manufacturing.”
But Bill Dugovich, SPEEA communications director, pointed out that Boeing offered no job guarantees to its members, many of whom have been working overtime or have been sent to Charleston to fix problems created by 787 outsourcing.
“Many of our folks are correcting outsourcing problems,” Dugovich said. “The global supply chain has bred a plethora of problems.”
Boeing’s Albaugh, as well as company Chief Executive Jim McNerney, have said the company learned some lessons from the extensive outsourcing strategy of the 787. Most notably, they say the company needs to bring back in house some of the engineering work that Boeing initially gave responsibility to its supplier partners.
“Albaugh is saying all the right things about bringing back work,” SPEEA’s Goforth said.
But SPEEA’s leaders aren’t counting on Boeing to do the right things.
Goforth already sent his organizing director on a scouting trip to the South, looking for sites to organize engineering and technical workers. SPEEA’s director declined on Thursday to say which factories were visited.
Although SPEEA’s Goforth disagrees with Boeing’s choice of Charleston, he admits it makes sense to have engineering support on-site there. Boeing already sends SPEEA members from the Puget Sound region to help out in Charleston. Goforth doesn’t see that slowing with the addition of a second line — Boeing still needs experienced engineers and technical workers.
That was something Boeing’s original supplier, Vought, didn’t get. Boeing bought out Vought’s Charleston operation in July. Even with the help of Boeing engineers from this area helping out, the Charleston factory still sees “massive problems,” Goforth said.
Developing a new aircraft takes time and skilled workers, SPEEA’s Goforth and Dugovich said.
“That seems to be an overlooked challenge,” Dugovich said.
Comments
(
